I don't think physical play is an end itself; it's just a means to an ends. For example, Bourque's physical game is the only reason I would take him on the PK over Lidstrom (by a very small amount tho).

I don't think physical play is an end itself; it's just a means to an ends. For example, Bourque's physical game is the only reason I would take him on the PK over Lidstrom (by a very small amount tho).

Why would physicality outweigh the importance of positioning and smart defensive play on the penalty-kill?

I agree Bourque is certainly more physical but, I don't see that as a detriment to Lidstrom, since he made up for it with such intelligent play.

Why would physicality outweigh the importance of positioning and smart defensive play on the penalty-kill?

I agree Bourque is certainly more physical but, I don't see that as a detriment to Lidstrom, since he made up for it with such intelligent play.

Lidstrom's only weakness was defending large forwards in front of the net - he wasn't bad at it, just not as good as some others. He might be the best ever at defending the transition game, which is why I have him slightly above Bourque at even strength defense

I think Bourque gives you more options, but if you have a specific idea of what kind of team you want to build, then there are situations where Lidstrom would be the better choice. Good pick, and nice to see him get a bump.

Penalty kill: very small advantage Bourque because he's tougher in front of the net

Overall, a small but clear edge to Bourque (mainly because of even strength offense). But the difference is small enough where picking Lidstrom first isn't that big a deal.

Yeah, that sounds about right. Bourque is the more well-rounded player, and easier to build around in ATD terms. When I owned Lidstrom, I felt that it was important to get him a physical partner who could bring some offense at even strength. I managed to do that pretty well, but still, it was something I had to consider. Bourque doesn't need any particular quality in his partner, aside from just generally not sucking. I see that as an advantage.

Somebody correct me if I'm wrong, but doesn't Ray Ray still have a longevity edge on Lids?

Yeah, that sounds about right. Bourque is the more well-rounded player, and easier to build around in ATD terms. When I owned Lidstrom, I felt that it was important to get him a physical partner who could bring some offense at even strength. I managed to do that pretty well, but still, it was something I had to consider. Bourque doesn't need any particular quality in his partner, aside from just generally not sucking. I see that as an advantage.

Somebody correct me if I'm wrong, but doesn't Ray Ray still have a longevity edge on Lids?

Bourque struggled at times in the playoffs when teams could key on him in transition, so I think you want to give him more help in transition in the ATD than he had IRL.

Of course you could say the same about Orr to a lesser degree, so it's hardly a damning criticsm.

Bourque struggled at times in the playoffs when teams could key on him in transition, so I think you want to give him more help in transition in the ATD than he had IRL.

Of course you could say the same about Orr to a lesser degree, so it's hardly a damning criticsm.

This is why we went Lidstrom... Bourque had to be the center of his offense when playing... no fault of his bit it was he and an undrafted center for many years that ran the Boston offense and the situation developed his style to a great degree. Perhaps he does not do as well if you give him a puck management system with good depth... Lidstrom however is the best I have ever seen at starting things from his end... he'd pinch sure but 99% of the time he was the trailer on those plays after having jumpstarted a beautiful rush.

He was Mr. Consistent... you look at his career and playoff PPG and it was virtually unchanged. Bourque had a drop in those numbers as teams keyed on him in transition as you say.

He was Mr. Consistent... you look at his career and playoff PPG and it was virtually unchanged. Bourque had a drop in those numbers as teams keyed on him in transition as you say.

Completely agree that Lidstrom was a very consistant player , but to say that in a post when comparing Lidstrom with Bourque is a bit strange considering Bourque finished his career with thirteen 1st all-star teams and six 2nd all-star teams.

I do know for a fact that Lidstrom was the common factor on all the successful Detroit teams of the last couple decades.

The forwards changed over a couple of times. Maybe they looked so good partly because of him or the way Detroit was able to train them because of his presence?

Like I said, we'll know more in a couple years.

That's not a really fair way of looking at this , because while I think Lidstrom was the most important piece of the 90/00s Detroit teams , they were some pretty spectacular forwards playing on those teams as well , like xxx and xxx just to name a few.When they were gone other star forwards stepped up with xxx and xxx helping the wings in their prime.The problem with your take on the problem (which is to wait a couple of years and see what happens) is that both xxx and xxx are getting older and past their prime and there's no sign of anybody stepping up and replacing them.